Mobile Workers Work Longer Hours 117
Qedward writes "Last month it was reported on slashdot that a third of workers at a British telecoms company were 'more productive' working from home during a telecommuting experiment to prepare for the London 2012 Olympics. A more recent study reveals almost two-thirds of mobile employees say they are working 50+ and 60+ hour weeks, with most also working weekends. It also has security implications, with most mobile workers saying they will do anything to get an internet connection, including hijacking unsecure networks. The problem of needing a connection has also led to an increase in workers waking up through the night due to stress."
Re:Remote working is the future (Score:5, Insightful)
It's also a feature that you're on call 24/7, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Remote working is the future (Score:5, Insightful)
It's also a feature that you're on call 24/7, right?
There's no reason you have to answer work calls outside of your scheduled work hours. If they want you on call 24/7 then ask for compensation.
Re:Remote working is the future (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
That's life for many IT people. I did my share of on calls, but not anymore. I am in long term recovery mode.
Re:Remote working is the future (Score:5, Insightful)
Get used to it people. It's a green initiative.
No necessarily. If you don't work at home, you also don't have to keep your home warm (or cool) enough to be comfortable during the day. The office, on the other hand, will be kept at a reasonable temperature whether you're there or not.
My wife's work is about 30 miles away, but she works from home most days. We calculated that, on the coldest winter days, the carbon cost of driving to work was about the same as the extra heating that would be needed if she stayed at home. If you have a shorter commute, or have a greener method of transport than driving a car, it's quite likely that it's greener to work in the office than to work at home.
Re: (Score:2)
If that is actually true, you need better insulation.
Re:Remote working is the future (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps some numbers would be helpful here.
We have a small semi-detached house with cavity wall insulation, loft insulation, and double glazing. We still need over 10kW to heat in the cold months. If we're out of the house for 10 hours, we save roughly 100 kW hours (*). How far will your car go on that amount of energy?
(*) Of course, it's not that simple because we have to use extra heat to bring the house back to normal temperature when we get home. A more accurate analysis would compare the temperature-time graphs for the two scenarios and use Newton's law of cooling. Nevertheless, the above figures are roughly correct.
Re: (Score:2)
Well the Tesla S has a 40kW battery, which if you're actually using 100kW you could charge 2.5x.
Tesla S range: 160miles 100MPGe
My car does ~45mpg on my commute (city driving).
So since we have (thanks to tesla) a very easy comparison between straight KW and MPG we see:
(2.5 * 160) * (45/100) = 180miles
In real units that's just shy of 300 Kilometers.
Re: (Score:3)
Note that kW is a unit of power, kWh is a unit of energy
Your figures weaken the support for your argument (that staying at home is greener than driving to work) significantly: they suggest it's greener to drive to work as long as it's less than 90 miles away from your home.
I disagree with your calculation, but the point remains broadly the same. Here's an alternative calculation. According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org], 1 US gallon of gasoline is equivalent to 33 kWh, so 100kWh is equivalent to 3 gallons US. At 45 mpg US
Re: (Score:2)
I was not furthering my argument, I was answering your question.
You gave an outrageous (and wrong, even with shitty insulation) figure for heating your home and asked me how far I could drive my car on that energy, I answered.
According to you, you spend 4x the entire average household energy consumption on heating alone. You're either lying, or living in a house made of cardboard with just open holes for windows.
Re: (Score:2)
So now that I've answered your question, now you can answer mine:
How much energy does it actually take to heat your house... because it's not 10kW/h.
Re: (Score:3)
How much energy does it actually take to heat your house... because it's not 10kW/h.
"Kw/h" is not a unit of either energy or power. However, I can confirm that 10kW is approximately the power needed to keep my house comfortable in the winter. I know this because I know the ratings of the radiators in the house at 60 celcius, and I also know that they need to be kept at close to 60 celcius more or less constantly.
Re: (Score:2)
Firstly, I repeat: get better insulation.
Secondly, "10kW/h for 10 hours" is a measure of energy.
Re: (Score:2)
Firstly, according to your figures above (where you say 100 kWh is equivalent to driving 180 miles), 60 miles is equivalent to 33 kWh. This corresponds to 10 hours at 3.3 kW. 3.3kW is not enough to keep a house warm in subzero temperatures unless it has no windows.
Secondly, 10 kW/h means '10 kilowatts per hour', which has no physical meaning whatever. A Watt is a unit of power, not energy.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, 3.3kW/h is TONS to keep any reasonably insulated house scorching hot.
And for the love of god you moron you didn't say "10kW/h" you said "10 kW/h for 10 hours"
How fucking dumb are you?
Re: (Score:2)
3.3kW/h is TONS to keep any reasonably insulated house scorching hot
I assume you mean 3.3 kW, but I would be interested to see a source stating that this is enough to maintain a 20 degree (Celsius) difference between inside and outside for any "reasonably insulated" house.
And for the love of god you moron you didn't say "10kW/h" you said "10 kW/h for 10 hours"
There's no need to be offensive. It was you who said "10kW/h for 10 hours". You're using kW as a measure of energy, and kW/h as a measure of power. This is incorrect, as I've pointed out. "kW/h" would be a unit at the rate at which power changes.
How dumb are you?
Smart enough to know the difference between kW, kWh and k
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We calculated that, on the coldest winter days, the carbon cost of driving to work was about the same as the extra heating that would be needed if she stayed at home.
But you've less chance of ending up in a fiery car accident after sliding off the road on black ice.
Re: (Score:2)
We calculated that, on the coldest winter days, the carbon cost of driving to work was about the same as the extra heating that would be needed if she stayed at home
The carbon cost may be the same, but the Al Qaeda cost is not. When we import oil to make gasoline we are funding some of the World's nastiest and most repressive regimes. Natural gas for home heating is produced domestically (I am assuming you are in the USA because you commute miles instead of km).
What? (Score:5, Insightful)
"The problem of needing a connection has also led to an increase in workers waking up through the night due to stress."
Seriously?
What in the world is this shit? How can someone even attempt to work from home without a solid Internet connection and with no secure method of connecting to the company network? And waking up in the middle of the night because you need a connection to the fucking internet? Man, what a mess we're living in. And I thought I was messed up.
Just get a fucking solid Internet connection. Surely one could afford it, I mean come on...
Re:What? (Score:5, Insightful)
Even ignoring the connection thing, stress while working from home is a problem. The work is with you all day long and you feel pressured to keep whittling away at it, making relaxation difficult.
Re:What? (Score:5, Insightful)
Obviously, your mileage will vary. Working from home isn't for everyone - some people concentrate better at work, some people can't stop working if they work from home, so on, but for some, it's quite advantageous.
Re:What? (Score:5, Insightful)
Bullshit.
I've been working from home for a while and it's very relaxing. You can dress very, VERY casually, for example. I attended many a meetings while sitting butt-naked in a cozy chair. You can have a beer or whatever (I don't drink alcohol, though), you can pet the cat (I do) and so on and so forth. Lack of noisy-nosy-annoying colleagues is a plus. And as far as work being with you all day long, in a world where a laptop is ubiquitous and you can take it home, not to mention company provided VPN and webmail or mobile device connectivity, well, work's there already.
I honestly think that whoever worries more while working from home either doesn't understand what "working from home" means or has deeper problems (including but not limited to a pathological fear of being fired).
Re:What? (Score:4, Funny)
Bullshit. I've been working from home for a while and it's very relaxing. You can dress very, VERY casually, for example. I attended many a meetings while sitting butt-naked in a cozy chair. You can have a beer or whatever (I don't drink alcohol, though), you can pet the cat (I do) and so on and so forth.
While you probably make many excellent points, I only managed to read so far as the part about being butt-nekkid, rubbin' pussy all day...
Hell yea! Where do I sign up??
Re:What? (Score:4, Informative)
I had a friend work at a large company that began moving to working from home. He jumped at it, rented his house out, and rented a place out in Hawaii with his girlfriend. He loved it. Not too many others jumped in. He was baffled and started asking why. No one wanted to be at home all day. Some found being at home too stressful; spouse, small kids, noise, etc. Others simply liked being around other people they know for a part of the day. Others were too programmed with the office/home mentality of work/not-work.
Re: (Score:2)
True, I stopped working from home when my son was born, but that's because we rent a tiny apartment and he sleeps while I work and I am in meetings a lot. So it's not that it doesn't work for me; it doesn't work for him well.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
That sounds like a good reason for getting a social life outside of work.
I rarely socialize with coworkers outside the office, I have "real" friends. (real in quotation marks to distinguish them from those "friends" some people have through work who are really just people they hang out with because it's convenient).
Re: (Score:3)
I rarely socialize with coworkers outside the office, I have "real" friends. (real in quotation marks to distinguish them from those "friends" some people have through work who are really just people they hang out with because it's convenient).
Well, many of the people I am friends with are people that at some point was convenient to hang with, be it friends of friends, school mates, fellow students, sports team etc. so why not coworkers? When you're chatting at the lunch table you've already passed many barriers compared to making friends with a random stranger. Of course hopefully you have old friends as well but people drift apart and move away or get too busy with girlfriends and family so if you're not replenishing your social network it's li
Re: (Score:2)
Well, obviously a lot of the people I know are people I have met in various places over the years, a few through work, others through other friends, some that I've just bumped into somewhere and somehow we became friends.
My point was more about those who use work as their primary source of social interaction and mostly have "friends" that are also coworkers. Whenever I've left a job I can safely say I've only kept in touch with maybe one in ten of my coworkers, not because I disliked them but because to be
Re: (Score:1)
I work from home 3 days a week, and have children and this is my biggest problem. Probably because I have children at home. Otherwise working from home is great. But I don't get stressed, I don't wake up in the middle of the night stressed, and I sure as hell ain't on call 24 hours a day.
I do like to be able to start coding something though, and not have to stop at a quarter to five, drive an hour home and then start working on it tomorrow. It's nice to start coding something, work on it till it's done.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Well if you can enjoy that during a meeting, you're REALLY SICK!
"Oh yea.. look at those figures..."
Re: (Score:2)
That's because you are less dissatisfied with your work environment and can focus for a longer time, because you're not interrupted that often.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
FYI, I live in Eastern Europe and my country is in top 10 as far as average connection speed goes. And I pay 10 bucks a month for a good, fast, reliable connection. Aaaaand... I have a free 3G USB stick with unlimited traffic included in my 10-bucks-a-month subscription.
A third of them should be fired. (Score:5, Insightful)
a third of workers [...] were 'more productive'
two-thirds of mobile employees say they are working 50+ and 60+ hour weeks
Which means a third is working more hours while not doing a damn thing more.
Either that or a lot of people are lying about how much they work.
Re: (Score:2)
Why should they be fired, unless they're billing by the hour?
A third of them might be taking longer to do the same work because they're taking more breaks, cleaning up after a kid, answering the door, whatever -- dealing with more interruptions. But if they're doing the same amount of work and being paid the same amount, why should anyone care?
(If they're paid by the hour and billing more hours, then okay.)
Re:A third of them should be fired. (Score:5, Funny)
Reporter: "How many people work in your company?"
CEO: "Oh, about half."
Re: (Score:1)
Reporter: "How many people work in your company?"
CEO: "Oh, about half."
Yea, the numbers got a little better after we made the floggings mandatory...
Re: (Score:1)
OK everybody, whoever is working at home, raise their hand.....
Good... Now, everybody who is reading Slashdot and working at home, raise their hand.
Ah, funny that. Same hands....
Re: (Score:1)
Are you implying they are slacking off because they are "working" from home? /.
Because I'm currently "working" at work and reading
(posted AC for obvious reasons)
Re:A third of them should be fired. (Score:4, Insightful)
a third of workers [...] were 'more productive'
two-thirds of mobile employees say they are working 50+ and 60+ hour weeks
Which means a third is working more hours while not doing a damn thing more. Either that or a lot of people are lying about how much they work.
No, it doesn't - more productive means doing more per hour, not doing more by spending more time working. In fact, you'd expect lower productivity from people working 50+ hours, not higher, ceteris parabis. What I suspect does happen, though, is that chopping two hours of commuting out of the day makes it possible to work longer before getting the same level of productivity fall....but that really is just my guess.
Re:A third of them should be fired. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
a third of workers [...] were 'more productive'
two-thirds of mobile employees say they are working 50+ and 60+ hour weeks
Which means a third is working more hours while not doing a damn thing more.
Either that or a lot of people are lying about how much they work.
Or they were working 50+ or 60+ hours before, and now they're getting more done in the same amount of time. Or, they accomplish the same amount in the time they're working, but they spend more time working because their bosses confuse "working from home" with "always on call".
Re: (Score:2)
a third of workers [...] were 'more productive'
two-thirds of mobile employees say they are working 50+ and 60+ hour weeks
Which means a third is working more hours while not doing a damn thing more.
Either that or a lot of people are lying about how much they work.
Or they were working 50+ or 60+ hours before, and now they're getting more done in the same amount of time. Or, they accomplish the same amount in the time they're working, but they spend more time working because their bosses confuse "working from home" with "always on call".
Working more hours for the same quality and quantity of work just shows poor time management on the part of the employee.
My point was that they could have a higher workload placed upon them. Even if that's not a significant problem, I would caution against kneejerk "fire the bum" judgements.
If they are exceeding expectations at home then they would probably do the same in the office
Maybe. Maybe not. I would love to be able to work uninterrupted. That's something people at my company don't understand. They think you can just call up a developer at every whim, and they're pretty much right. The only part they don't get is that the developer cannot work in five-minute spurts. If I had the option to tune all that out and
Re:A third of them should be fired. (Score:5, Interesting)
One of my closest friends became a remote worker after having worked with them for a few years. She now puts in more than 40 hours per week on a regular basis, but it isn't for lack of productivity. It's because she's out of sight and out of mind, which leads to all sorts of problems.
Just this week, she had the following happen:
1) She was assigned a task on Monday with a hard deadline of Friday morning. It was a tight deadline, but she figured she was up for it.
2) She discovered that she couldn't start until TRIVIAL_TASK_X was done on their end, so she let them know and worked on some bugs in the meantime, figuring it'd be handled immediately.
3) She reminded them that X needed to be done. And again. And again.
4) They started X on Wednesday and finished it an hour later, leaving her two days instead of the necessary four for the task.
5) She asked for help, since there was no way she could easily meet the deadline. Her request was denied, and she was told to make it happen anyway.
6) Because she's not paid by the hour and was told to still meet the deadline, she felt obligated to put in 16 hours on Wednesday and another 16 today.
That sort of thing never used to happen to her in the years that she was working on-site, but stuff like this (though not this bad) happens rather frequently for her these days. Whenever she visits them on-site, things are good again for awhile, but then they seem to forget that she's not a machine after awhile. She's ended up being the person who receives all the tasks that no one else wants to do, and she's had excessive work land in her lap on a much more regular basis since moving off-site. She's no less productive today than she was when she was on-site. She simply has more demanded of her since she's out of sight and mind and they fail to realize the burden they are placing on her. (And, to be fair, I think part of the blame lies with her for not speaking up more often or more clearly).
Meanwhile, I work 40 hours a week. The idea that if you need overtime your manager probably messed up is a part of the culture here. I keep telling her to quit. She keeps staying with them like an abused spouse.
Re: (Score:2)
I've heard the same sorts of stories many times, and I do believe every word of them.
However they all share a common theme, which boils down to the fact that the company has ass-hat managers.
Is the lesson really don't work from home when your manager is an ass-hat; or is the lesson that working for ass-hats sucks and you shouldn't do it?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I completely agree. I wasn't using my post to suggest that working from home is a bad idea. I was using it to suggest that the previous poster's idea that remote workers are simply wasting time and being unproductive isn't considering other factors that may be in play.
Re: (Score:3)
Your "friend" needs to get over it and stand up for herself. Seriously, I work from home 100% and this kind of crap happens all the time. Even to folks who work in the office. The only difference is that the folks in the office CANNOT get the work done while the person at home can.
This is the perfect example of, "just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD." Just tell your boss or whoever that you were given two days to get a job done that takes five. Or do what I do: Convince them that the task doesn't n
Re: (Score:2)
My "friend" really is a friend. This wasn't all just a half-assed attempt at being sly on my part with a personal problem, though I can't blame you for thinking otherwise. She was a college friend of mine and I've kept in touch with her and her husband (who's also a friend of mine and a former roommate) since they moved away a few years ago. We IM chat most days, so we both tend to be pretty aware of what's going on at the other person's work.
And I completely agree. I've been suggesting time and again that
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Her mistake was that when she found out trivial task X was not done was in not taking the rest of the day off. Do chores, run errands, watch telly, work out, take an online course, or make some other good use of your time. But don't let yourself get screwed out of you life. Oh, and don't bill for those hours. It would be unethical. But bill for the late hours you have to put in. It should even out if you are careful.
"Employees say..." (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, and I have Bigfoot doing all the server backups. You expect them to say they are doing less work? Or even the same amount of work? No confirmation from their companies on whether the company saw an increase in productivity?
Now before everyone gets flippy, I have known some people who did the mobile thing and were more productive, mostly because they didn't have people interrupting them every 5 minutes, and actually liked working more (as in hours) that way because it was more enjoyable. I also have known people that did their work in 3 hours and played games the rest of the day (also maybe because they could do 8 hours in 3 because of less distractions.
Main point- employees are never going to say anything bad about work out of the office.
Re: (Score:3)
If I could work from home I'd be willing to work 10 more hours each week (the amount of time I spend on the road). Of course driving is more fun than work, so maybe cut that in half.
Re: (Score:2)
You know what, I'd probably do the same thing. Add in the time to shave, shower optional, getting dressed in the monkey suit all adds up, plus the drive time. Hell, I could check my email while eating my Raisin Bran. Pop on the local sports radio show while doing whatever, and it's like driving (well, for me anyway). And just being able to have the temperature below 76 degrees would be worth at least 3-4 hours. (I swear, women are reptiles)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
That bites, especially if you do what I think you do.
They may work more hours, and more productively, (Score:5, Insightful)
But having commuted for five hours a day in the past, and worked from home on other occasions, I would much rather work nine hours at home than work for eight in the office with even one hour of commuting.
Fuel, tires, collisions, stress, bus fair, everything associated with commuting sucks. I would much rather talk on the phone and fill out my work logs in my underwear than that.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you obviously don't live/work near Houston.
Re:They may work more hours, and more productively (Score:5, Interesting)
When I do have the occasion to work a full day from home (rare, but it happens) I end up working a 10hr day, and find myself missing that reading time.
Re: (Score:3)
I wish we had a good train system around here. I used to take the bus downtown, but to say the least there was too much over-crowding, bouncing, jerking around and too many traffic fumes to properly enjoy reading. I did some of that, but it was easier some trips that others.
Doubt they work longer... (Score:5, Insightful)
Worked from home for the past 10 years...
I have no doubt they say they work longer... but it's more likely they just feel like they are working longer.
With no separation between work and home, it can feel like you are always working, even when you're not. And that is what keeps them up at night.. the stress from never being able to wind-down.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure that's the case for many people, but I've worked from home and I can tell you I was just as busy at home if not more so. There's nothing like having to take a leak in your own home with the bathroom being 20 feet away and not being able to do it because you can't get away from the phone. Heck, at the office I had people come by and chat, had meetings, and lots of little BS manual tasks, at home it was nothing but pure phone and remote support and the people were stacked up in the queue so deep yo
Re: (Score:3)
"here's nothing like having to take a leak in your own home with the bathroom being 20 feet away and not being able to do it because you can't get away from the phone."
There is a secret technology called bluetoothso you can be on the phone with a headset. and if you sit and pee they cant hear you, that's why girls do it.
Re: (Score:2)
I actually had one of these things [itrush.com], but the range sucked, even with my tiny little house made of wood it would cut out when I left the formerly screened in porch converted into a bedroom we called my office.
Also, a good portion of my work was done with remote control programs where I took over the users computer with them watching. Usually I would try to sneak in a leak when we first initiated a call while I was talking them through setting up their system so I could get in. BTW, Bomgar [bomgar.com] is awesome.
Re:Doubt they work longer... (Score:4, Funny)
FTFY :)
Re: (Score:2)
This is what I discovered. It actually got to the point where to do "work" i left the house and went to my favorite cafe in town. They had wifi, but I have a mobile hotspot as well for another means of connecting if they happen to be having issues or their connection is over saturated.
It's 10 minutes away by bike, or about 5 by car if the weather is bad and usually my routine is wake up about 7AM, check email for anything important overnight, go take a shower and grab a snack for breakfast, get to the caf
what will happen with Olympics network over load? (Score:2)
what will happen with Olympics network over load?
I can see working at home turning into a big mess. even more so if cable nodes over load.
What fools are doing this? (Score:4)
When I work from home, I dont even THINK of starting until start time and I am offline the second 5pm hits. Phones go to voicemail, sucks to be you with yout 5:01 TPS report as I will not even know about it until 7:59 the nest morning.
If you let your employer abuse you, they expect you to take it. Stand up and realize you are doing your office a favor by working there, not the other way around.
Re: (Score:2)
No it's nice to be able to do this. I work from home about 4X a month. and I just refuse to be abused. The side effect is that I dont work for shitty companies.
I have turned down job offers because I get a bad feeling from the owner/HR/management. But I also wander a bit after the interview and talk to other employees. get the real dirt before you work somewhere.
And yes the BSA call is a great weapon, be sure to follow it up with an anonymous OSHA violation tip.
Oh and if you work in one of the shitty
Re: (Score:2)
Oh and if you work in one of the shitty states that lets the employer fire you for any reason, I suggest moving.
To one of the only 11 states that aren't "shitty"? Gonna be crowded!
I've been remote since last Feb. (Score:1)
Sleep at night (Score:2)
"The problem of needing a connection has also led to an increase in workers waking up through the night due to stress."
A spliff before bed does wonders for that.... ;)
PeopleWare Strikes Back (Score:1)
What? People more productive?
Why? They are only:
- away from noisy cubes.
- away from hallway meetings.
- saving time from a commute.
- saving aggravation from a commute.
- a few feet from their private bathrooms and break-rooms. (Not several hundred feet down a long, busy hall.)
BellSouth (now AT&T) also discovered a productivity boost among employees allowed to telecommute during the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta.
Re: (Score:2)
What? People more productive?
Why? They are only: - away from noisy cubes. - away from hallway meetings. - saving time from a commute. - saving aggravation from a commute. - a few feet from their private bathrooms and break-rooms. (Not several hundred feet down a long, busy hall.)
BellSouth (now AT&T) also discovered a productivity boost among employees allowed to telecommute during the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta.
The first two items are total productivity killers for me. I can't count the number of times I've had to put on headphones in an attempt to filter out co-workers' talking. Now if I could just get people to use complete, understandable sentences when they IM me, I'd get even more work done.
Data security with mobile workers (Score:4, Interesting)
Data security classically was: you keep your data in a mainframe, and give people only terminals.
Then it was: You give people PCs, but put gum in the USB slots.
These days that's hard to do because motherboards want keyboards and mice to be USB.
Not to mention laptops. And in some companies (like Nokia US), it's all laptops all the time. And mobile (i.e., no) offices.
In such a scenario, how do you protect against an employee who wants to cp the entire database (design, products, customers, whatever)? Or other documents?
Maybe this should be an Ask Slashdot.
Re:Data security with mobile workers (Score:4, Interesting)
That same needs to be looked at with corporate security. Some businesses really do need super high security. Most do not.
Another unbiased survey (Score:2)
Enterprise global Wi-Fi network provider iPass surveyed 1,700 mobile employees at 1,100 enterprises worldwide...The survey also found that 88 percent of these wireless heads thought cable-free access was "as important to their lives, or almost, as running water and electricity". Another 95 percent reported significant reductions in their job productivity without wireless access.
It's not clear to me that "mobile worker" means the same as "telecommuter". But the article seems to be saying that companies need to run out and buy more Enterprise Global Wi-Fi Networks (tm) so they can get employees happily working 60 hours per week and being more productive at the same time. Sure, we'll get right on that.
Than who? (Score:3)
Mobile workers work longer hours than workers in other cities in Alabama.
Re: (Score:1)
The summary provided is indeed a mish-mash of confusion: Is it about telecommuters or, indeed, "mobile" workers?!?
Mobile workers != Working from home (Score:2)
Telecommuters work from home. They do not need to worry about connection because they are at home and they have one available (unless they are so cheap that they are connecting to theirs neighbours').
Mobile workers (aka road warriors) are the guys that roam the country (think of vendors) and have to connect to office from wherever they are. I know a lot of them and yes they work at all, mostly because after their normal routine they often are stranded in someplace where they know nobody so, instead of being
What about supervision? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
You look at their results. Are they delivering quality work on deadline or in a reasonable amount of time? Are they making sales? Are clients/customers happy with their work? Aren't those the only things that matter?
Unsecured networks? (Score:5, Informative)
As for hours, yes, I work longer hours at home but I can work them when I want (more or less, meetings permitting) so can be around for the school run, making dinner for the family in the evening etc.
Not Really (Score:1)
50 to 60 hours? Yet when you deduct the commute they're back to under par.
Maybe they should try farming. I only work 80 to 100 hours a week, but at least I don't have to commute and the quality of life is spectacular farming.
my question with telecommuting is... (Score:2)
Okay so if you are in the office (or in a remote office) they would stump for your internet connection so why is it not common practice to pay for a connection for your telecommuters??
(aka why is an internet connection an issue??)
Are they really working longer and/or harder? (Score:3)
OK, suppose they put in the same amount of effort as in the office. Now consider the following:
1) They do not have to commute. That saves hours of time each week, a two hour daily commute amounts to 10 hours a week. They are in fact recapturing some of those extra hours.
2) Less commuting means less stress and probably better productivity.
3) They save money on bus fares and other commuting expenses. A de facto pay raise.
4) In some places I have worked parents had to take an hour or so to pick up kids, drop them off at home or day care then rush back to work. The creates less need for rushing around and/or paying for day care. That is an instant increase in quality of life.
Those are a few of the immediate benefits I see. My conclusion is that even if they work a few more hours, they benefits far outweigh the drawbacks.
Re: (Score:1)